Mitigation of Ground Vibration due to Collapse of a Large-Scale Cooling Tower with Novel Application of Materials as Cushions
Table 6
Maximum acceleration amplitude in radial, tangential, and vertical directions at different distances in computational Cases 1, 2, and 3 for cooling tower under seven earthquake waves.
Earthquake (hor. PGA when collapse)
Computational case
Max. acceleration amplitude in different distances (m/s2)
Radial
Tangential
Vertical
200 m
300 m
400 m
200 m
300 m
400 m
200 m
300 m
400 m
RG1.60 (0.6 g)
Case 1
15.39
5.75
1.82
2.83
0.71
0.27
29.49
11.71
4.05
Case 2 (percentage reduction)
0.98 (94%)
0.37 (94%)
0.21 (89%)
0.34 (88%)
0.16 (78%)
0.12 (57%)
1.65 (94%)
0.75 (94%)
0.34 (92%)
Case 3 (percentage reduction)
6.21 (60%)
3.13 (46%)
1.20 (34%)
2.79 (1%)
0.69 (3%)
0.27 (0%)
12.81 (57%)
5.71 (51%)
2.46 (39%)
Coyote Lake (1.7 g)
Case 1
14.47
3.09
2.54
2.50
0.30
0.19
29.98
13.57
4.67
Case 2 (percentage reduction)
0.44 (97%)
0.24 (92%)
0.12 (95%)
0.14 (94%)
0.05 (84%)
0.03 (86%)
1.05 (96%)
0.46 (97%)
0.19 (96%)
Case 3 (percentage reduction)
1.96 (86%)
1.07 (65%)
0.45 (82%)
0.57 (77%)
0.18 (40%)
0.10 (50%)
5.51 (82%)
2.00 (85%)
1.02 (78%)
Kobe (0.6 g)
Case 1
12.80
5.67
1.77
3.77
1.04
0.42
32.47
11.81
5.06
Case 2 (percentage reduction)
0.85 (93%)
0.32 (94%)
0.21 (88%)
0.39 (90%)
0.19 (82%)
0.17 (59%)
0.88 (97%)
0.43 (96%)
0.29 (94%)
Case 3 (percentage reduction)
5.46 (57%)
2.41 (57%)
0.96 (46%)
1.90 (50%)
0.72 (31%)
0.24 (42%)
11.53 (64%)
5.05 (57%)
2.35 (54%)
Loma Prieta (2.0 g)
Case 1
5.02
2.11
0.59
1.41
0.21
0.15
12.59
3.36
1.22
Case 2 (percentage reduction)
0.79 (84%)
0.26 (88%)
0.12 (80%)
0.26 (81%)
0.07 (64%)
0.08 (50%)
1.83 (85%)
0.71 (79%)
0.26 (79%)
Case 3 (percentage reduction)
1.57 (69%)
0.42 (80%)
0.20 (67%)
0.31 (78%)
0.13 (38%)
0.04 (72%)
3.00 (76%)
1.18 (65%)
0.40 (67%)
Northridge (0.7 g)
Case 1
12.54
3.62
1.57
3.13
0.78
0.28
25.66
8.72
3.58
Case 2 (percentage reduction)
0.86 (93%)
0.30 (92%)
0.20 (87%)
0.21 (93%)
0.07 (91%)
0.07 (76%)
1.50 (94%)
0.62 (93%)
0.40 (89%)
Case 3 (percentage reduction)
5.66 (55%)
2.15 (41%)
0.89 (43%)
1.46 (53%)
0.59 (24%)
0.19 (33%)
11.74 (54%)
4.96 (43%)
1.86 (48%)
San Fernando (1.3 g)
Case 1
9.79
3.00
0.51
0.65
0.21
0.10
17.98
5.77
0.73
Case 2 (percentage reduction)
0.47 (95%)
0.21 (93%)
0.22 (57%)
0.17 (74%)
0.06 (69%)
0.06 (43%)
0.83 (95%)
0.26 (96%)
0.14 (81%)
Case 3 (percentage reduction)
1.63 (83%)
0.44 (85%)
0.34 (33%)
0.47 (27%)
0.15 (30%)
0.09 (8%)
2.32 (87%)
0.98 (83%)
0.30 (59%)
Whittier Narrows (2.4 g)
Case 1
8.71
2.49
1.28
2.64
0.86
0.27
25.19
6.26
2.49
Case 2 (percentage reduction)
0.75 (91%)
0.40 (84%)
0.12 (91%)
0.22 (92%)
0.12 (86%)
0.06 (79%)
1.71 (93%)
0.52 (92%)
0.19 (92%)
Case 3 (percentage reduction)
8.66 (1%)
2.49 (0%)
0.73 (43%)
1.02 (61%)
0.34 (60%)
0.17 (37%)
15.77 (37%)
4.65 (26%)
1.94 (22%)
Averaged percentage reduction
for Case 2
93%
91%
84%
87%
79%
64%
94%
92%
89%
for Case 3
59%
53%
50%
50%
32%
34%
65%
59%
52%
Note. Percentage reduction = (value in Case 1 – value in Case 2 or 3)/value in Case 1.
